Revisionist History in Irvine


It’s a TV spot brazen in hypocrisy or at least flip-floppery.  But Mayoral candidate Christina Shea and Council member Stephen Choi have put out a TV spot calling for the passage of Measure H which council-proofs Irvine’s ethics ordinance on no lobbying being done by council members while they hold office.

The kicker is how both think the anti-lobbying measure is a good start but they want more.  Quite a change of heart.

From the OC Register in 2006, when the ethics ordinance first debuted:

Krom proposed the ordinance a year ago. About $10,000 in legal fees and 100 hours of city staff time was needed to research and draft the 250-plus-page ordinance, which came before the council last month.

At that meeting, longtime council adversaries Agran and Shea led a nearly four-hour debate – Agran arguing for the ordinance, Shea against it.

Shea runs a government consulting firm, which likely would fall under the provisions of the ordinance’s lobbying provisions. No allegations have been made against Shea on her lobbying work.

But the key paragraph, which is directly at odds with the ad is here:

At 11:37 p.m. the final vote was taken and the ethics ordinance was passed with a 3-2 vote (Christina Shea and Steven Choi dissenting). That vote came after Shea and Choi’s substituted motion failed (with a 3-2 vote, Krom, Larry Agran and Sukhee Kang dissenting) – that would have adopted the ethics ordinance without the lobbying section.

Wait..the lobbying section that the TV add says is a good start?  Sounds like a flip flop to me.  This is the same meeting Choi uttered words of “when I’m mayor…” and then passed on a chance to oppose Beth Krom in 2006.

Shea no longer lists Christina Shea Consulting as having any political consulting ties, even if this site does, and this site and this site. And there’s more, but you get the idea.  Just Google the reference for Christina Shea Consulting and the return description you get reads:

 Christina Shea Consulting

Services include government relations, community relations, political consulting, business development, grant preparation,and IT services. – 2k – CachedSimilar pages


  6 comments for “Revisionist History in Irvine

  1. May 20, 2008 at 2:54 pm


    Good catch. I wonder if the “Irvine Tattler” will pick this up any time soon… Or are they just interested in spreading false rumors about the 3 Dems on the council?

  2. RG
    May 20, 2008 at 3:03 pm

    Irvine would be a much better place if Shea moved out of town!

  3. Jubal
    May 20, 2008 at 3:15 pm

    Glad to know that if I ever lost my mind and moved to Irvine, I would be prohibited from serving on the Irvine City Council due to my occupation.

    Not everyone can be a full-time mayor because their spouse is the bread-winner.

  4. Dan Chmielewski
    May 20, 2008 at 3:40 pm

    Matt —
    If you ever moved here, you could take your kids out of Catholic School and send them to some of the finest public schools in the state.

    You probably don’t know this, but Mayor Krom’s husband is disabled and wheelchear bound; hardly the breadwinner but I’m not going to pry into the mayor’s personal finances except to say, she hs kids in college like you do.

    There are restrictions and eligibility requirements to run for office based on a number of things. I believe if you are a lobbyist representing clients before the city, it excludes you from running for council. I think Irvine cops are not allowed to run either. I’m sure Adam knows all the ins and outs for you.

    But no comment on the flip-flop?

  5. May 20, 2008 at 5:15 pm

    Wow, That’s a great ad. Larry’s only reason to put Measure H on the ballot was to try and soften up Christina for her run for Mayor, otherwise if he was really for ethics, he would put the entire ordinance to the voters as a Charter Amendment. It’s Orwellian that Larry is orchestrating this measure. He’s the one without any ethics.

  6. Dan Chmielewski
    May 20, 2008 at 6:17 pm

    Thanks for not contesting the hypocrisy of Shea and Choi’s support for this measure Allan, considering they already voted against it twice and put up an alternative that threw out the lobbyist provision they say is a good start. Perhaps if they sit through all the council meetings — as they were elected to do — instead of storming out of meetings, they wouldn’t miss so much. So why the change of mind Allan. Stephen get new marching orders from someone texting him during council meetings?

Comments are closed.